Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Lack of convictions for RAPE...I really want to do something about this, if possible

142 replies

InmaculadaConcepcion · 03/03/2011 12:57

Having just read about the DM story concerning the man acquitted of rape because he was "too drunk" and the subsequent horrendous account of a poster's own failed attempt to get justice for her rape on the same thread I am spitting with rage.

I want to do something positive. I have a baby daughter and I don't think I can be comfortable with myself if I don't make some attempt to fight for justice for rape victims and send out a message that RAPE IS A SERIOUS CRIME AND SHOULD BE TREATED AS SUCH.

I have two thoughts so far about this:

  1. Set up a campaigning blog reproducing press accounts of rape cases and (where no press reports exist) publishing rape survivors' own accounts.

and

  1. Set up a charity specifically to raise funds to assist rape survivors to pursue civil cases against their attackers.

These are just kernels of ideas at the moment, but I would welcome any suggestions about how I could make this work.

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Original poster
InmaculadaConcepcion · 10/03/2011 12:29

Well spotted, AyeRobot! Thanks for posting the link.

OP posts:
Prolesworth · 10/03/2011 11:45

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

AyeRobot · 10/03/2011 11:43

And this bit:

"Hence, while the 2003 reforms may lead to increased consistency in jury directions, this did not necessarily translate into consistency in jury decision-making. In particular, it was felt that juries would still fall back onto their own definitions and understanding of consent. For example, Barrister eight stated: ?I think there?s probably a common shared perception of what consent is and what it isn?t.? Accordingly, certain barristers felt that the statutory definition was unnecessary and that, ?? most juries, I think, would understanding what it means ...? (Bar 14). What may be considered disconcerting is the extent to which a juror?s own understanding of consent may permit stereotypical opinions relating to appropriate sexual behaviour, to unduly influence a decision. Thus, the question may not be whether there was or was not consent, but whether sexual intercourse was considered appropriate in such circumstances ? the definition of consent in such situations becomes somewhat irrelevant.

Barrister 14 provides corroboration for this point by arguing: ?? it looks academic ? but actually in real life ? half of the things just don?t come into play. It?s facts, facts and who believes who. That is what the jury are interested in.? Misgivings therefore existed regarding the extent to which the statutory definition has helped the jury."

I think that answers a lot of the questions we have on here when seemingly straightforward cases go pear-shaped.

AyeRobot · 10/03/2011 11:36

Interesting article on Barristers' Perspectives

Especially this bit - "It was, however, suggested that the statutory definition was more useful for lawyers than jurors, with many arguing that the jury would often struggle to interpret the definition. Indeed, several barristers felt that the 2003 Act may have overcomplicated the law,with one barrister specifically stating that juror?s lack of understanding may result in acquittals. Barrister one stated: ?... quite often, I do think that a juror, in a case on balance, may say well I just don?t understand this and I?m not going to convict a man or a woman of this because I don?t understand.?"

Unrulysun · 09/03/2011 18:25

Ignore me - have found it :)

Unrulysun · 09/03/2011 18:19

Can't find blog and link on other thread isn't working for some reason?

aviatrix · 08/03/2011 18:38

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
InmaculadaConcepcion · 08/03/2011 17:53

Thanks Proles - I posted on the other thread that this is perfect to start the blog off - and what better day to set it in motion?

OP posts:
Prolesworth · 08/03/2011 14:45

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Original poster
InmaculadaConcepcion · 07/03/2011 12:42

Stop Rape is fine by me!

I'm going to go with setanewprecedent for the illustrative blog, but an unequivocal name such as that for the website is excellent.

Perhaps if the website framed demands for:

procedural change in rape cases that get to court?

a fund for rape survivors who wish to pursue their attacker through the civil courts?

education on the subject in schools?

specialist tutorials/seminars on the subject for trainee lawyers?

ditto for trainee police officers?

....??

OP posts:
Prolesworth · 07/03/2011 10:47

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Original poster
InmaculadaConcepcion · 07/03/2011 07:34

Thanks for that tip, neeps - it's a good website.
(I hope the wind issues are easing...!)

OK, I've started to set up a blog by creating an email account specific to the blog.

Prolesworth (and others) would you be willing to put our "demands"/mission statement etc. on the website you've got the name for?
If not, I can include those in the blog (once I've had help from you guys in framing them..! pretty please).

I'm going to go ahead with the blog for collecting reports etc. illustrating the situation we are fighting. Then I will have links from the blog to other campaigning websites etc.

So, to keep the blog updated regularly, please suggest links etc. to cases/reports etc. that we can highlight.

TIA!!

OP posts:
neepsntatties · 05/03/2011 04:00

Women Against Rape do a lot of work in this area, they work on individual cases but also do campaigns.

I love the I believe you slogan.

aliceliddell · 04/03/2011 20:15

liking that idea...

Original poster
InmaculadaConcepcion · 04/03/2011 19:23

Yes, that was what gave me the idea... Smile

OP posts:
aliceliddell · 04/03/2011 19:21

Just realised there is a thread on winning damages by Ayerobot. Sorry! Well done finding it, Ayerobot

aliceliddell · 04/03/2011 18:19

re:Immaculada's post (08.56 yesterday) I remember having discussions about the sueing in civil courts idea when there was a case involving a dentist about 1992ish....the woman won damages, but it never seemed to go further. Does anyone know why? Cos an organisation could take several cases and pool fees and any damages won. So all who took part would at least get a bit of compensation and support. Not enough, obv. but better than current sod all?

Original poster
InmaculadaConcepcion · 04/03/2011 17:02

Thanks URS! Let's hope we can keep up the momentum.

Well, the reason I was thinking of a blog was because:

a) They are free and easy to set up and

b) I believe the legalities concerning defamation etc. are still a grey area for blogs, so we may be able to be a little more frank than in a more "official" site (again, I'm ready to be corrected on this assumption...as a former journo I would still err on the side of caution when it came to avoiding potential libel actions and/or contempt of court)

Having said that, I've no objection to using the current domain and campaign name you've got waiting in the wings, if you're all agreeable.

OR

We separate and link the two, as already suggested, with the blog concentrating on reproducing the various reports/articles etc. and the "official" site concentrates on the main message and the campaign itself.

OP posts:
Unrulysun · 04/03/2011 16:18

Maybe something that says that we exist to actively challenge rape myths in the media and in society?

At some stage maybe some of us would want to get together to discuss this in some detail?

Well done IC btw! I have been thinking about this a lot and I'm glad someone's being so proactive . :)

Prolesworth · 04/03/2011 15:07

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Prolesworth · 04/03/2011 15:02

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Original poster
InmaculadaConcepcion · 04/03/2011 14:47

OK.

While we continue with the discussion, I think I will go ahead and start to assemble info etc. for a campaigning blog.

Can you please post links and/or give names to recent-ish rape acquittals that you can remember (beyond those already mentioned)
Also, any more sensible articles on the subject, like that in the Guardian, would be good too.

And shall we try and frame a short list of what we believe/are trying to achieve here...?

(I'm not sure we've agreed on this yet, though!!)

We could keep it simple, eg:

  1. WE BELIEVE YOU - a woman who reports a rape needs our support, not our cynicism.
  1. Rape "myths" must be prohibited from the court environment and challenged if merely implied by a defending counsel.
  1. Juries should have access to specialist advice so they do not fall into rape myth "traps" that may cloud their judgement.

etc. These are just off the top of my head at the moment, so I'm hoping you'll help with framing the actual demands and the wording thereof, please fellow MN feminists!

OP posts:
scurryfunge · 04/03/2011 14:30

Juries know what consent is too - it is the in-built prejudices that disregard the consent that is the problem, I think. If we are to concentrate on the issue of consent, the starting point should be why society chooses to ignore a woman's decision to say no.

garlicbutter · 04/03/2011 14:23

I thought that, if a jury can decide a man who forced himself on a neighbour did NOT have 'guilty intent', then they think he reasonably believed she consented. That's why I feel the matter of consent needs widespread clarification & education.

It's not a matter of the man knowing it's rape - of course he knows. It's about the jury believing he knew.

Started a thread on consent in Chat. It's not going anywhere much at present.

scurryfunge · 04/03/2011 14:19

As garlic said, the police and prosecutors are being targeted -it is just slow progress. (police forces will be cutting their training too now).

Swipe left for the next trending thread